Chris Wallace did Fox proud

LAS VEGAS — Wednesday was the first time a Fox News anchor moderated a general election presidential debate. And Chris Wallace was not going to be outfoxed.

He was prepared to challenge both Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump when they strayed badly from answering the question at hand and the contest started to slide off the rails. And he satisfied conservatives by framing questions in their language — and that of his network, which had never in its 20-year history moderated a general-election debate — without either caving to Trump or alienating Clinton supporters.

Story Continued Below

Still, the first 40 minutes or so was something of a shock to careful watchers of the previous two presidential debates.

It was calm. Issues like gun control – or, as Wallace framed it, “upholding the Second Amendment” — the Supreme Court, abortion, and immigration were discussed in scholarly detail. There wasn’t that much interrupting or name-calling.

Wallace’s different perspective was evident in his questioning. It wasn’t that Wallace was offering up Fox-like conservatism. But he pushed Clinton harder than she had been pushed at previous debates. And the salacious buffet of leaked videotapes and women accusing Trump of inappropriate behavior was addressed — but not among the first questions.

The subjects thrilled conservatives. “Where do you want to see the court take the country and how should the Constitution be interpreted?” Wallace inquired in his first question, following up with questions about the Second Amendment.

"I think Chris Wallace just became my BFF with these 2A questions,” tweeted conservative radio and television host Dana Loesch.

The next subject? Abortion.

“Do you want to see the court overturn Roe v Wade?” Wallace asked Trump, pressing him to actually commit to overturning abortion rights. With Clinton, he went directly for the abortion-related issue that troubles even a sizable percentage of abortion-rights defenders – the late-term procedure known as “partial-birth” abortions.

"I want to explore how far you think the right to abortion goes. You have been quoted as saying that the fetus has no constitutional rights. You also voted against a ban on late term partial birth abortions. Why?” Wallace asked.

"That unfamiliar sound you hear is substance being discussed in this presidential campaign,” tweeted the Washington Post’s Karen Tumulty.

When the conversation predictably pivoted away from a question asked about immigration and onto Russia and Vladimir Putin, Wallace let the conversation evolve, chuckling that "We're a long way away from immigration,” but allowing the candidates to finish their thoughts.

To Clinton he demanded: "You have offered no specific plan for how to secure the southern border,” cited allegations of “pay-to-play” with the Clinton Foundation and took note of her speeches to big finance groups unearthed in hacked emails from WikiLeaks, which elicited a “thank you” from Trump.

To Trump, Wallace fact-checked the candidate at least twice, saying at one point plainly, "you said several things in that [last] debate which were not true, sir. You said that Aleppo has basically fallen.” When Wallace did, after nearly an hour, get to the groping allegations that have emerged since the last debate, Wallace asked "Why would so many different women from so many different circumstances over so many different years … Why would they make up these stories?"

Despite Wallace’s best efforts the debate did at some points devolve into the candidates talking over one another and shouting — Trump honking out “wrong” and Clinton barreling through Wallace’s attempts to cut her off.

“Mr. Trump, I’m not a potted plant here I do get to ask some questions,” Wallace admonished as Trump tried to talk over Wallace about Putin and Syria.